About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)
are to buy the pentagon didn't show you any video of things that miss. that is bad pr. and the percentage of weapons that were smart weapons in the first gulf war but infinitely more than anything the iraqis had was remarkably small compared to the impression the pentagon gave them a military briefing for the alicia pictures of smart bombs and smart missiles and things fly into windows. that was the percentage actually expended. so i don't think this is a revolution in military affairs so much as a vivid demonstration of just how proficient the united states was in waging war, especially can do this proficient adversary. but it also is a military affairs in a fundamentalist about is the car still has a boat here and the ultimate goal of the conflict was a political goal and therefore the military plan made that involve smart and weapons were designed with a traditional military conclusion, which in truth is not revolutionary at all, getting the enemy to do what she wanted. i can't see it as fares. and getting assigned from the back right of time, but i do want to give -- >> yet, let randy
the organization would fallen apart. think about any organization. i work until the pentagon it would have made it better. so -- [laughter] we realize the you have to go after the people who do the work. the people who do logistics, communications, pass information, build car bombs, communicate. so you to take them out. so we came out with the strategy. and philadelphia love this. it's like rocky and apollo. we're going hit them in the midsection and hit them a lot. from august of 2004 when we did 18 rides, two years later, same month, same force, same fight we were doing 300 raids a month. that's ten a night. now, if you stop and say you ten a night. that's a lot. that's impressive. that means every raid guy on the force is going a raid at least one every night. every pilot is flying one or two raids every night. and these raids are not patrols inspect is not a -- these are going in the door somebody is getting shot. extraordinary. and to do that, though, you can't use previous systems. one you have to be able to bring in the intelligence on the industrial scale. you have to get to the point w
effective leader at the pentagon. john brennan is somebody i worked with the at the director of cia and continued to work with in this capacity. i found him to be responsible about how we can effectively conduct operations again al qaeda and against those that would attack this country. he is -- as somebody said, a straight shooter. somebody who, you know, gives you his best opinion, he doesn't play games. he is somebody who i think, you know, can honestly represent the best protection in this country in that job. >> thank you very much. i want to thank you for your forthright comments today about the sequester. ironically, as i take some notes what you said and in the statement. it appears as of today the greatest threat to american national security is the united states congress. thank you, mr. secretary. thank you, senator. senator nelson. after senator nelson, the first round will be over. there may be a number of us that want a few minutes on the second round. you have been here for about three hours and you may need a fife or ten minute break. do you want that immediately foll
was also inducted into the hall of heroes at the pentagon and honored with a parade. since then meyer has raised more than a million dollars to help send the children of wounded marines to college. and finally, as you have all seen, he is the author of "into the fire: a firsthand account of the most extraordinary battle in the afghan war." leading authorities is very proud to exclusively represent dakota meyer, and now i want to show you a video to hear more about dakota and his story. thank you. ♪ >> it's kind of frustrating because, you know, everyone wants to get an interview about the worst day of your life. >> it was a straightforward mission that then-21-year-old sergeant dakota meyer had been assigned that day. meyer waited anxiously by the vehicles as his team began their parol of the village on foot. as they approached, all hell l broke loose. more than 50 insurgents fired from positions on mountains surrounding the valley and from within the village. back at the vehicles, meyer heard the firing and could see into the valley. the volume of fire increased, and the radio traffic
other americans. the pentagon never received the request from the state academy for security, and did not have the resources to get support on the ground in time to thwart the attackers. leon panetta is stepping down. this hearing is four hours and 15 minutes. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, everybody. today the committee welcomes secretary of defense, leon panetta, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general martin dempsey. to testify about the department of defense's response the deadly terrorist attack on the u.s. temporary mission facility in benghazi, libya, last year. and the findings of its internal review following that attack, including lessons learned from benghazi. we will be receiving testimony next tuesday morning on the impact of sequestration and/or a full-year continuing resolution on the department of defense witnesses. there will be department secretary of defense, the comp driller and the joint chiefs of staff. i hope today's hearing with inform the committee of any changes being made or proposed to the posture of u.s.
. just this morning, i was over at the pentagon and i took advantage of the opportunity to sit down with the navy's top ship-building official to discuss what the impact of sequestration would be for our naval fleet. well, one example we've already seen. the navy will keep the u.s.s. abraham lincoln, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, in port rather than repairing and deploying it. across the fleet, the navy is being forced to reduce deployments, maintenance and overhauls for critical repairs. when we look at the ship-building budget, it is evident that sequestration and the continuation of a partial year funding resolution known as the continuing resolution would be absolutely devastating for our navy, for shipbuilding and for our skilled industrial base, and that includes bath ironworks in maine which i'm so proud of which builds the best destroyers in the world. and this has consequences, not only for our work force but also for our national security. it's important to note that secretary panetta has made clear that allowing these sweeping cuts to go into effect would be -- quot
that came out recently. it did suggest the pentagon is pushing the pentagon that would only keep 8000 troops in afghanistan. i know that general austin, you weren't a part of the process so far, but can you support a plan that was scheduled withdraws troops in advance? you know, we're looking at withdraws troops in afghanistan and according to this article from a passing down to 1000 within a short period of time, i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdraw when sec previously, so much depends on the ground, what the government is doing, what variability eyes up to that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i certainly would first really work hard to make sure i fully understood with the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. certainly my advice is the commander on the ground or commander central command would provide my advice based upon breaking the security forces are and the conditions in theater and what i think we need to do to move forward to make sure we maintain the
organization, if the key person gets taken out, does it really get worse? i worked in the pentagon, it would have made it better. [laughter] so we realized you've really got to go after the people who do logistics, communications, pass information, build car bombs, communicate. you've got to take those out. and so we came up with a strategy, and i know philadelphia will love this, but i used to tell people it's like rocky balboa and apollo creed. we're going to hit them in the midsection, and we're going to hit them a lot. so from august 2004 when we did 18 raids, two years later same force, same fight we were doing 300 raids a month. that's ten a nightment now, if you stop and you say, well, ten a night, that's a lot, that's impress e. that means every raid guy on the force is going on a raid at least one raid every night. every pilot's flying one or two raids every night. and these raids are not patrols. this is not a foot -- these are going in the door, somebody's getting shot. extraordinary. and to do that, though, you can't use previous systems. one, you've got to be able to bring in th
authorities. he served for three decades as an army special forces officer and top pentagon official in july 2001 he assumed the duties of military assistant to secretary rumsfeld and worked daily with the secretary for the next five and a half years and then upon retirement from the army he continued at the pentagon as deputy assistant secretary of defense. please join me in welcoming steve bucci. steve? [applause] >> let me add my welcome to all of you. i think we're going to have a real treat this morning. as john mentioned, i'm a special forces officer by profession, and so this area is near and dear to my heart because this is kind of what we do, or did. they don't let me do it anymore. [laughter] i mentioned to max when he came in a little historical artifact in that when i was a cadet at west point, i bought a book that had just been published. it was a two-volume set. it was called war in the shadows, the guerrilla in history by robert asprague. that book from 1975 til now really has been the sort of benchmark for this kind of historical review of this subject area. that's a long tim
panetta held what could be his final press conference as head of the pentagon. he announced the creation of a military award called the distinguished warfare metal. the secretary also talked about north korea's nuclear program. the troop drawdown in afghanistan and the series of automatic spending cuts called sequestration. secretary panetta will retire pending the confirmation of defense secretary nominee chuck hagel. [laughter] >> you are on your own, kid. >> good afternoon. as you know, this is i believe my final press conference here at the pentagon briefing room. there are moments when i thought i was part of the last act of an italian opera and i'm not sure exactly when it would end. i think that the congress will act, and that they will confirm chuck hagel this week. what i wanted to do was come down and use this opportunity to first of all thank you all, all of you that are part of the press corps here and the press in general. throughout my 50 years in public service, i have always believed, believed very deeply in the role of the press. because i believe deeply in the role of t
is confirmed and sworn in." close quote. so if anybody's under any misapprehension, i believe the pentagon press secretary has made that clear, we have a secretary of defense. he has not resigned, and he will continue to serve until such time as his successor is sworn in. and i would just say again to my friend, the senator from illinois, the assistant majority leader, we all know what a filibuster is. a filibuster is designed to kill a nomination or to defeat legislation, as the senator from tennessee said. and i would say this is equivalent to what happened back in 2005, and i have a letter here, mr. president, i'd like to ask unanimous consent to be made part of the record following my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: and i will refer to it. this is a letter signed by chris dodd, our former colleague who served on the foreign relations committee, and joe biden when he was the ranking member of the foreign relations committee back in 2005. it's entitled "dear democratic colleague, we write to urge you to oppose the cloture on the bolton nomination tonight. w
and the pentagon is going to have to scramble to figure out what to do given the budget this year in the middle of the fiscal year. we are five months into it. we have to come back, cut the loops, have longer conversations about how to get a more sensible plan into place. >> host: what is going to happen tomorrow in your district? pc and immediate effect? >> guest: it is really more played out over a series of months. furlough notices that have gone out to a number of employees, but over the next couple of months, i think nobody is really exactly sure what is going to happen. we will begin to see the impacts on possibly fewer employees, tsa, the department of defense, they have to deal it back, they are all across the board. >> host: in regards to a series of editorials this year, a couple of days ago, un- scary sequester was a the headline. yesterday was the sequester revelation. they say even with the sequester, we will spend more money than even we spent last year. >> wow, that is not actually true. we will be spending more money in the federal government. but it is a different type of thing
get it worse? i worked in the pentagon. it would have made it a lot better. so we realized you really have to go after the people who do the work, people who do logistics, communications, pass information, do car bombs, you have to take those out. we came up with a strategy, philadelphia would love this. it is like rocky balboa and apollo creed. we'll hit them in the midsection and hit them a lot. from august of 2004 when we did 18 raids, two years, later, same month, same force, same fight, we were doing 300 raids a month. that was ten a night. now, if you stop and you say, well, ten a night, that's a lot, that's impressive. that means every raid guy on the force is going on a raid at least one raid every night. every pilot's flying one or 2:00 raids every night. and these raids are not patrols. this is not with foot, these are going in the door, somebody is getting shot. extraordinary, and to do that though you can't use previous systems. one you've got to be able to bring in this intelligence on an industrial scale. you have got to be able -- we got to the point where instead of th
effect. the pentagon needs a seasoned leader to diplomat these cuts, cuts for which an overwhelmingly majority of republicans in congress voted. the so-called sequester, mr. president, was supported by 174 republicans in the house of representatives, 28 republicans here in the senate, 60% and 75% of the two republican bodies in this country. we have a balanced proposal to replace those across-the-board cuts for this year with smart spending reductions which must continue, a measure to close corporate tax loopholes and wasteful subsidies. and revenue from the wealthiest among us, americans making millions of dollars each year. it's critical that the republicans and democrats come together to find a balanced way to avert these drastic cuts. the consequence of the so-called sequester cuts are real not only for national defense but for millions of american families and businesses alike. three-quarters of a million jobs, 750,000 jobs, mr. president, are at stake. across the country tens of thousands of teachers, including thousands of workers with disabled children would be laid off. 70,00
coming out of the pentagon. one i was looking up now because i wanted to remember the numbers, and that was that the pentagon is beefing up cybersecurity forces, taking it from 900 to 4000 and putting a few billion dollars into it. the other one that is being beefed up in these times of budgetary constraints are the special forces. tom, would you talk about that generally? if you would talk about that in a broad nature and then we will come over to the nonexistent challenge that faces in asia. >> i will try to be brief. these are certainly needed and are believed to exploit, you know, this is pretty critical. but it is not qualitatively different from other forms of intelligence gathering or attempts by propaganda or by the military were a strategic situation. the special operations forces, to some degree in, is understandable. but as fred alluded to, we must direct action to magically appear and sustain themselves. if you have seen "zero dark thirty", it's a great picture of how the intelligence went and then the heroine appears at this brown looking base in afghanistan and a
it through the bureaucracies of the pentagon. america needs chuck as our secretary of defense to bring our troops home and keep our military the strongest in the world. sergeant hagel was an american hero. when so many americans were dodging the draft he volunteered to serve in vietnam. the draft board gave him the option to return to college but chuck refused. he said i think the best thing for me is to go in the army. it may not be the best thing for the army but i think that's the way to get all this straightened out. yfsz the oldest of four boys, he said, my sphawr passed away and i just was not coming together the way i should. there was a war going on in vietnam, i felt a sense of some responsibility so i said no, i think it's time to go. and so i volunteered for the draft. went in the army and celebrated my 21st birthday in white sands missile range. and chuck didn't serve in a safe bullet. when assigned to germany he volunteered for vietnam and saw the horrors of war as an infrant fantdry sergeant. he hand his brother tom are the only known american brothers to serve side by side i
the pentagon press corps for an award called the distinguished medal. he also addressed north korea's's nuclear program and the troops withdraw and afghanistan and sequestration. >> as you know, this is i believe my final press conference here at the pentagon briefing room. there are moments when i thought it was the last act of an italian opera. i'm not sure exactly when it would end and the fat lady would sing. but i think that the congress will act and they will confirm chuck hagel this week. so what i wanted to do is to use this opportunity to first of all thank you all, all of you that are part of the press corps here and the press in general. throughout my 50 years in public service, i have always believed very deeply in the role of the press. because i believe deeply in the role of the american people in our democracy, the information is the key to an informed electorate. while we may or may not agree with every story in the grand scheme of things, because of the work of the press i believe the truth always comes out. and in the end, we cannot really serve the american people well unless
and a half years, and then upon retirement from the army continued at the pentagon is deputy assistant secretary of defense, homeland defense, and america security affairs but please join me in welcoming steve bucci. [applause] >> let me add my welcome to all of you. i think you're going to have a real treat this morning, as john mentioned him on a special forces officer by profession, and so this area is near and dear to my heart. this is kind of what we do. they don't let me do it anymore. i mentioned to max when he came in a little historical artifact, and that when i was a cadet at west point i bought a book that had just been published, a two volume set. it was called war in the shadows, the guerrilla in history. that book from 1975 intel now, really has been sort of benchmark for this kind of historical review of the subject area. that's a long time for a book to keep that sort of position. well, with apologies, i think his book is being replaced now, and max has done that with this book which is on sale outside, "invisible armies," he i think you set a new benchmark for the subj
've seen two budget-related announcements coming out of the pentagon. one, i was looking up just now because i was trying to remember the numbers, and that is that the pentagon is beefing up its cybersecurity force, taking it from 900 to 4,000 and putting a few billion dollars into it. the other one that is apparently being beefed up in these times of budgetary constraints are the special forces. tom, would you just talk about that generally and then, fred, if you would talk about that not just in afghanistan, but in the broader battle and the nature of it, and then we'll come over to publish shah and the non-- membership shah and the nonexistent challenge that faces us in asia. [laughter] >> i'll try to be brief, dani. look, these new capabilities, you know, cyber operations or whatever you want to call them are certainly necessary and needed, and our ability to exploit, you know, the electromagnetic spectrum configured as the internet is, you know, pretty critical. but it's not qualitatively different from other forms of intelligence gathering or, you know, attempts to either by pr
spending and half is on nondefense spending, so it's about $46 billion in cuts hitting the pentagon. about the athena marketing discretionary instead be an 8.5 to 9% across-the-board cut for every agency of the government with some exceptions. the entitlement spending on medicare, social security is largely spared to the skies. >> it is a quick review of how the idea they sequester came about. >> this has become like watching 10 lower at this point of how this happened. bob woodward at the post has been putting forward findings in a very pronounced way lately. according to woodward, the idea originally came from jack lu. in the 1980s they used a similar proposal as an enforcement trigger. the idea that these cuts is a researcher crony and you'd come up with a smarter way to do it, to come to a deal on how to do a better way. jack lu, if they're trying to come to an agreement, rather than use the debt ceiling increase as an enforcement trigger, they have to go through that again before the election. how about these sequestration with automatic across-the-board cuts and they had to convince
of veterans who are entitled to their health care by causing the pentagon possibly to have to reduce or eliminate tricare funding. that's just unconscionable to me. >> host: on the issue of blame that gregory kind of gets into, washington post poll out today asked about a thousand people about where they would assign blame in this sequester issue. 45% assigning it to congressional republicans, 32% to the president, another 13% assigned it equally between the two. about five more minutes of your calls, and we'll be back to the u.s. senate at 2:15 eastern. in california, rodney's on our democrats' line. >> caller: yes. i question the legality of the sequester agreement, because to my understanding sequester is to hold property by judicial authority. the property we're talking about here is the taxpayers' money. since congress has no judicial judicial -- since congress is not a judicial branch of the government with nor do they have judicial power, i don't understand how could they even implement the sequester? >> host: here's a tweet that says the sequester was obama's idea, but it bac
reasons, the pentagon and the planners have made their own case to the president. and with the new resource problem we confronted in mali, look what it took to support french against al qaeda sub contractors. if we can't do that when in fact americans are held hostage and killed, what kind of response do you really expect for . >> is that a consequence of the u.s. not getting involved in mali earlier? >> what is the implication from that we in effect need to be involved -- . >> the u.s. has been concerned about mali for at least eight nows. -- months only now there's a discussion about where we should do more. >> look, in the time of the great extra cater. we are -- that -- what is threaten, our foreign policy is not manic interventionism right now. that's not what we have to worry about here. >> let's move on. if you have a question, raise your hand. i'm going ask you to identify yourself. keep your question short. let's go to [inaudible] of radio-- and then go to the woman right here in the black and hand the microphone to her. >> hi, my name is -- [inaudible] that syria is part
. these are decisions that have to be calculated at the pentagon, and the political cost has to be evaluated in the white house. if you're going to do what you have to do fully and effectively. and if you can't have, yeah, can't have an operation. so if you're going to go that route you have to be fully committed to its success. >> please join me in thanking david phillips for a wonderful presentation, a preview of a great book. showing the relevance of your work and your ideas. thank you much. >> thank you, michael. [applause] >> and thank you all for being with us today. >> we are learning today the president obama has accepted the retirement of the longest serving leader of u.s. and nato troops in afghanistan, marine general john allen. he was the president's nominee to be supreme allied commander in europe. that nomination was on hold during a pentagon investigation into e-mails that general our exchange with a civilian woman who was linked to the scandal that forced general david petraeus to resign. general allen has since been cleared of wrongdoing. the "washington post" reporting that
and the government from cyber attacks. at a symposium this morning, pentagon and security officials. live coverage at 9:45 eastern here on c-span2. and over on c-span, a conversation on national security and defense spending priorities. we'll hear from former deputy defense secretary john deutsche and former service armed services committee chairman sam nunn. live coverage from the brookings institution begins at 10 eastern. >> so the book concludes with lincoln attempting to get a job in zachary taylor's administration. it's a chapter called a comma at the end of the world. we're talking these days about meteors hitting the earth. well, at this time there's a talk of a meteor, a comet destroying the earth, and one of lincoln's friends is absolutely certain it's going to happen. in fact, lincoln chides him about it 12 years later when they meet again. but he's trying or very hard to get this job, commissioner of the general land office under zachary taylor, and he fails. it's a good thing he fails, right? if he's in washington, d.c. as a bureaucrat, he's not in illinois founding the republican par
to their parents sang were having a canned fruit drive, we are in stock if the pentagon every nice thing to do. the kid takes the note home. the mom puts the old can't have something in a backpack that's been in the back of the cabinet for the. the kid comes to school with his huge backpack on his back getting scoliosis from it, dumps it into a barrel summer, has no idea why this happens. and we are not creating activism. we are creating pack meals. and still we need to transform our service activities so there's a relational peace. these kids are developing relationships with the people that they are serving. and they're learning to have -- that's just one small example. the trend 13 -- the i. is in transit -- i could go off on this one. i apologize already because i'm bout to take on tbi is because it's one of my pet peeves. tbi this is basically a behaviorist orientation that treats children like pat animals that rewards them with jimmy's and disempowers them. i've got principals and superintendents after telling me, calling me from all over saying it's killing my school. how can i fight a
is of course an area heavh with pentagon contracts and military construction and the navy shipyard. what are you looking for? >> guest: the most interesting thing will be the votes in the e senate.d senate. i think it somehow democrats arf able to get the compromise bill, through that would offset the equation and would be very muchd thatpected. but that's maybe our one chance for the sequestered at this point. more likely it will be a vote where democrats put a plan forward and can garner enough support on the republican plan forward and also doesn't pass for the democratically controlled senate. and then you will see a lot ofph finger-pointing for roadsides with republicans saying the democrats couldn't pass the plad lannedsed one of the h nouse oft representatives and the democrats saying republicans are our cpromis blocked our compromise plan in the senate. so it's going to be a lot of there'-pointing and it will be very interesting to see if one oide or the other is able to garner a political the advantage. >> host: justin sink following the hill newspaper both on the hill and onlin
on that "washington post" article that came out recently. it did suggest that the pentagon is pushing a plan that we keep on about 8000 troops in afghanistan. i know that general austin, you weren't a part of the planning process thus far, but can you supported plan that would scheduled withdrawal of troops in advance? you know, we are looking at withdrawal of troops in afghanistan, and according to this article from about 8000 down to 1000 within a very short period of time. i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdrawal when, as you stated previously, so much depends upon conditions on the ground, what the government is doing, what their abilities are up to that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i certainly would first really work hard to make sure i fully understood what the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. and i certainly, my advice as a commander on the ground or commander of central command, i would provide my advice based upon where i think the security forces are, a
Search Results 0 to 27 of about 28 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)